FAQ

Frequently asked questions

The Social Progress Imperative is working through partners in the Social Progress Network to make the concept of social progress as important as economic growth or Gross Domestic Product. We are new and ambitious, maybe even a little radical, and so it's no surprise you have questions. Please consult the FAQs below, and don't hesitate to write us using the comment forms linked below. We'd love to hear from you.

1. Top 5 FAQs

Are you saying that economic growth is not important?

No. Our model shows that economic growth is strongly correlated with social progress, but the direction of causality can go from social to economic and other factors are important too. Hence economic development alone is an incomplete development strategy.

We want to break down the barriers that have separated thinking about economic development and thinking about social progress, to help countries and other communities design development strategies that are more holistic and more effective. TheSOCIAL PROGRESS INDEXallows countries and other communities to investigate the relationship between economic and social development much more rigorously and understand some of its root causes. The Social Progress Index will also help us understand how social progress can actually drive long-term economic success. See our chart below of Social Progress Index 2017 overall performance for each country compared to its GDP per capita.

No. Happiness is complementary to the Social Progress Index since there is a significant conceptual distinction to be made between the measurement of happiness or subjective wellbeing and the measurement of social progress. The Social Progress Index is not a measure of happiness or other forms of life satisfaction, but of actual life outcomes. However, there are fruitful lines of inquiry that use the Social Progress Index to understand the causes of happiness or wellbeing.

After controlling for GDP, there is a statistically and quantitatively significant impact of the Social Progress Index on life satisfaction. However, it is important to note that the relationship between subjective well-being and the Social Progress Index is complex. We have undertaken preliminary analysis of the relationship between subjective well-being and each dimension of the 2015 Index. Once one controls for GDP, there is no separate impact of the Basic Human Needs or Foundations of Wellbeing dimensions on subjective well-being; there is, however, a quite robust and independent impact of Opportunity on life satisfaction.

The Social Progress Imperative defines ‘social progress’ asthe capacity of a society to meet the basic human needs of its citizens, establish the building blocks that allow citizens and communities to enhance and sustain the quality of their lives, and create the conditions for all individuals to reach their full potential.

The Social Progress Index is an aggregate index of social and environmental indicators that capture three dimensions of social progress: Basic Human Needs, Foundations of Wellbeing, and Opportunity. The Index measures social progress strictly using outcomes of success, not how much effort a country or community makes. For example, how much a country spends on healthcare is much less important than the health and wellness actually achieved by that country, which is what outcomes measure. The image below shows the component-level structure of the 2017 SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX, which has 12 components (shown) and 50 indicators (not shown).

If you don’t measure, it is hard to make the most rapid progress. More and more people recognize that GDP alone is not an adequate guide for national development strategies. The Social Progress Index brings a new rigor to this effort, not by changing the way GDP is measured but by creating a complementary lens on national performance. Our goal is to measure social progress directly, comprehensively, and rigorously. Measuring social progress guides us in translating economic gains into advancing social and environmental performance in ways that will unleash even greater long-term economic success.

The Social Progress Framework is the main structure of the Social Progress Index—the three dimensions of Basic Human Needs, Foundations of Wellbeing, and Opportunity; four specific components for each dimension; multiple indicators in each component. The Framework is the structure on which the GLOBAL SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX and each PARTNER INDEX are built. The broad categories (three dimensions, by name; and twelve components, by name) examined in any Social Progress Index are the same as in the Global Index, but the indicators within each component will vary based on available data for a particular index.

There have been numerous efforts to go beyond GDP to improve the measurement of national performance. In designing the Social Progress Index we acknowledge the intellectual debt that we owe to these other efforts. As discussed in more detail in the Methodological Report, our work draws on a rapidly expanding academic and practitioner literature focusing on both individual and a few broader assessments of social progress. Our work has been guided by the objective of complementing and extending this work. (For an insightful framework and contemporary discussion of both the challenges and progress in moving “beyond GDP,” see Marc Fleurbaey and Didier Blanchet, “Beyond GDP: Measuring Welfare and Assessing Sustainability.” Oxford University Press, May 2013.)

The Social Progress Index is distinct from other wellbeing indices in its measurement of social progress directly, independent of economic development, in a way that is both holistic and rigorous. Most wellbeing indices, such as the Human Development Index and the OECD Your Better Life Index, incorporate GDP or other economic measures directly. These are worthy efforts to measure wellbeing and have laid important groundwork in the field. However, because they conflate economic and social factors, they cannot explain or unpack the relationship between economic development and social progress.

The Social Progress Index has also been designed as a broad measurement framework that goes beyond the basic needs of the poorest countries, so that it is relevant to countries at all levels of income. It is a framework that aims to capture not just present challenges and today’s priorities, but also the challenges that countries will face as their economic prosperity rises.

The Index has four key design principles:

Exclusively social and environmental indicators: our aim is to measure social progress directly, rather than utilize economic proxies. By excluding economic indicators, we can, for the first time, analyze the relationship between economic development (measured for example by GDP per capita) and social development rigorously and systematically. Prior efforts to move “beyond GDP” have comingled social and economic indicators, making it more difficult to disentangle cause and effect.

Outcomes not inputs: our aim is to measure the outcomes that matter to the lives of real people. For example, we want to measure the health and wellness achieved by a country, not how much effort is expended nor how much the country spends on healthcare.

Actionability: the Index aims to be a practical tool that will help leaders and practitioners in government, business and civil society to implement policies and programs that will drive faster social progress. To achieve that goal, we measure outcomes in a granular way that links to practice. The Index has been structured around 12 components and 52 distinct indicators. The framework allows us to not only provide an aggregate country score and ranking, but also supports granular analyses of specific areas of strength and weakness. Transparency of measurement using a comprehensive framework helps change-makers identify and act upon the most pressing issues in their societies.

Relevance to all countries: our aim is to create a holistic measure of social progress that encompasses the health of societies. Most previous efforts have focused on the poorest countries, for understandable reasons. But knowing what constitutes a healthy society for higher-income countries is indispensable in charting a course to get there.

The Social Progress Index builds on but is distinct from other efforts to define and measure wellbeing. We briefly explain our analysis of each of these measures below.

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX
The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of human development, providing a single statistic to capture both social and economic development. It is based on just four outcome indicators: life expectancy, mean years of schooling, expected years of schooling, and living standards (through the proxy of GDP per capita). The HDI excludes environmental indicators. Though the HDI covers 187 countries, the limited range of indicators mean that its descriptive and explanatory value is limited for upper middle and high income countries.

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS
The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) agreed upon by the United Nations in September, 2015 include a broader set of targets that apply to all countries in comparison to the Millennium Development Goals which preceded them and were focused primarily on poor countries. There is considerable overlap between the SDGs and the Social Progress Index (see section B1 this document).

MULTIDIMENSIONAL POVERTY INDEX
The MPI assesses the nature and intensity of poverty at the individual level along three dimensions: health, education, and living standards. It is based on measures of social outcomes only, using 10 indicators. The MPI covers 91 countries and is primarily focused on countries with extreme poverty.

OECD BETTER LIFE INDICATORS
The Better Life Index aims to paint a comprehensive picture of wellbeing by looking at people’s material living conditions and quality of life. It is based on outcomes indicators and is structured around 10 dimensions combining social, environmental and economic indicators. It is currently available only for the 34 countries of the OECD and indicator availability means that it could not be extended to include countries at all levels of income without revision to the model.

GROSS NATIONAL HAPPINESS
GNH is the national approach to measuring wellbeing of the Kingdom of Bhutan and is designed to “achieve a harmonious balance between material well-being and the spiritual, emotional and cultural needs of our society”. The GNH model mixes economic, social, environmental and cultural indicators, including inputs as well as outcomes. The GNH model is designed to be relevant to the cultural norms of Bhutan; it is not intended to be an internationally comparable benchmark. Many countries are now developing national wellbeing frameworks.

HAPPY PLANET INDEX
The Happy Planet Index aims to measure the extent to which countries deliver long, happy, sustainable lives for the people that live in them. It uses three social and environmental outcome indicators: experienced wellbeing (based on survey data), life expectancy, and ecological footprint. It currently covers 151 countries.

GENUINE PROGRESS INDEX
The Genuine Progress Index, based on a capital accounting framework, recognizes the value of human, social, and natural capital alongside manufactured and financial capital. It also assesses the economic costs of liabilities like crime, pollution, sickness, and natural resource depletion. While it has been used at different geographic scales, it has been used primarily in Canada.

No. By focusing on outcomes rather than inputs we have avoided the problem of ranking performance based solely on amounts of money spent on social programs. Our findings also show that economic development and social progress are linked but are not synonymous. Why some countries achieve higher levels of social progress at the same level of income as others is the result of cultural factors, resource endowments, business practices and government policy. The Index will allow us, over time, to investigate these different factors as we see which countries progress most rapidly on different components of the model.

Emphatically yes! The Social Progress Imperative wants the data we publish to be used and disseminated. We only ask that you credit the Social Progress Index and that you do not imply that we endorse your new product.PLEASE CONTACT US FOR FURTHER DETAILS.

The world overall (113 out of 128 countries) has improved between 2014 and 2017, according to the 2017 Social Progress Index. The population-weighted world score rose from 63.19 in 2014 to 64.85 in 2017—a 2.6% increase. The average improvement for countries was 1.37 points. This new trend analysis shows us Access to Information and Communications and Advanced Education are driving global social progress. Personal Rights, Safety, Tolerance and Inclusion, however, are eroding worldwide. The remaining seven components on the Social Progress Index have seen slow or uneven progress in the past four years.

Denmark is the world’s top performer on the 2017 Social Progress Index, closely followed by a combination of the remaining Nordic countries, as well as countries much larger in size and more diverse in population, including Canada, Netherlands, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Germany. Among the bottom performers on the Social Progress Index are some of the world’s poorest countries, including Central African Republic (ranked lowest), Afghanistan, Chad, Angola, and Niger.

Though there is a strong relationship between economic performance, as measured by GDP PPP per capita*, and performance on the Social Progress Index, some countries achieve much higher social progress relative to countries with similar GDP per capita. For example, Nepal scores 60.08 on the Social Progress Index with a GDP per capita of $2,312, while Yemen, with a GDP per capita of $2,649, scores only 43.46. The Index demonstrates that economic growth is not sufficient for social progress. Countries and communities that want better lives for their citizens need to go beyond economic growth alone in designing their development strategies.

Click the image above to view full size.

*The Social Progress Index uses the World Bank definition: “GDP per capita based on purchasing power parity (PPP). PPP GDP is gross domestic product converted to international dollars using purchasing power parity rates. An international dollar has the same purchasing power over GDP as the U.S. dollar has in the United States. GDP at purchaser’s prices is the sum of gross value added by all resident producers in the economy plus any product taxes and minus any subsidies not included in the value of the products. It is calculated without making deductions for depreciation of fabricated assets or for depletion and degradation of natural resources. Data are in constant 2011 international dollars.”HTTP://DATA.WORLDBANK.ORG/INDICATOR/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD

What is the relationship between the 2017 Social Progress Index and inequity?

We have found that the relationship between income inequality and social progress is complex. Many of the highest ranking Social Progress Index countries, such as Norway, Iceland, and Finland have some of the lowest levels of income inequality in the world, as measured by the Gini coefficient. Yet, when we look across all countries ranked on the Social Progress Index, we find there is little relationship between Social Progress Index scores and the Gini coefficient. Specifically, we find only a loose negative correlation (r=-0.37) between the two—that is, only a weak trend that, as income inequality increases, social progress decreases. Some countries with low income inequality, such as Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan, perform relatively poorly on the Social Progress Index.

Our research on this topic is ongoing. In our 2015 Social Progress Index Report, we established that extreme poverty is negatively and significantly correlated with social progress. This result is statistically significant and holds even when controlling for GDP per capita. It also holds for all three dimensions of the Index. Income poverty measures raise important issues about the direction of causation and the degree to which anti-poverty programs should focus on income or the wider capabilities of the poor.

Can I compare the 2017 Social Progress Index results to previously published years of the Social Progress Index? Where can I find data on past years?

The basic 12-component structure of the 2017 social Progress Index remains unchanged from prior years. However, each year, we assess each of the indicators that fall under these twelve components for data updates, retroactive revisions to previously published data, and changes in country coverage. Occasionally, this assessment requires us to replace an indicator that is no longer updated by its source with a conceptually similar indicator from a different source. These changes increase the rigor and relevance of the Social Progress Index; they also introduce an issue of comparability from year-to-year of published Social Progress Indexes. Indicators that are outdated or lacking data are replaced with more up-to-date sources.

As a result, each year, we recalculate the Social Progress Index for prior years. This allows us to compare 2017 Social Progress Index results with results from 2014, 2015, and 2016–years in which we previously published a Social Progress Index. These comparisons between years are important for understanding general trends in social progress over time. It is important to note, though, that the comparison is not perfect: many data sources do not update their data on an annual basis, so that the same data is used across more than one Social Progress Index year. Additionally, indicators measured on limited scales, such as Violent Crime (measured on a scale of 1 to 5) or Globally Ranked Universities (measured on a scale of 1 to 10), have a greater impact on change in a component score over time than indicators measured on a continuous scale.

In establishing the Social Progress Index model in 2014, we conducted literature searches to understand all major published points of view and then did an extensive search for suitable indicators. From a long list of possible indicators, we then tested for internal validity (does the indicator capture what it purports to measure?) and geographical availability (is the indicator available and reasonably up to date for most or all of our countries?). Each year, we reassess indicators for data availability and country coverage. We also incorporate feedback from our many users regarding indicators and measurement.

One of our goals is to encourage the production of better data. The are many issues we would like to capture within our framework, but cannot include for lack of data on a global scale. These include data on violence against women, homelessness, bullying, educational outcomes, and more. As such, we incorporate proxy indicators as placeholders for future data: for example, we include education enrollment data in Access to Basic Education, recognizing enrollment is not a good measure of quality of education, since it is not a good indicator of learning outcomes. Rather, an expansion of the OECD PISA framework on learning outcomes to more countries would be a huge step forward and would provide a better understanding of the variation in educational outcomes across countries.

The 2017 Social Progress Index draws on data from many different sources and was compiled with data from the following organizations:

Academic Ranking of World Universities, Barro-Lee Educational Attainment Dataset, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Freedom House, Fund for Peace Fragile States Index, Gallup World Poll, Heritage Foundation, Institute for Economics and Peace Global Peace Index, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, International Telecommunications Union, OECD Gender Institutions and Development Database, Pew Research Center Government Restrictions Index, Pew Research Center Social Hostilities Index, QS World University Rankings, Reporters Without Borders, Sustainable Energy for All, Times Higher Education World University Rankings, Transparency International, United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Institute for Statistics, United Nations Interagency Group for Child Mortality Estimation, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, United Nations Population Division, University of Connecticut Human Rights Institute, WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation, World Bank, World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report, World Health Organization, World Justice Project Rule of Law Index, World Resources Institute, Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy and Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network Environmental Performance Index.

Scores are all based on a 0-100 scale defined at the component level. This scale is set by using the best and worst scores theoretically possible on each indicator for the 100 and 0 values. For indicators which have a large absolute range or no maximum or minimum, we identify the best and worst global performance on each indicator by any country since 2004 to set the maximum (100) and minimum (0) bounds. A simple average of the four components creates each dimension score, which in turn aggregate to a Social Progress Index score, for each country, using a simple average of the three dimensions. As a result, Social Progress Index scores are benchmarked against realistic rather than abstract measures. This scale will also allow us to track absolute, not just relative, performance of countries over time on each component of the model.

Relative performance on the 2017 Global Social Progress Index refers to whether a country performs weakly or strongly compared to the 15 countries nearest to it in GDP per capita.

In the 2017 Global Social Progress Index, relative performance is categorized as one of the following:

Overperformance: A country performs better than one average absolute deviation from the median of the group of 15 countries with most similar levels of GDP per capita

Performance within the expected range: A country performs within one average absolute deviation from the median of the group of 15 countries with most similar levels of GDP per capita

Underperformance: A country performs worse than one average absolute deviation from the median of the group of 15 countries with most similar levels of GDP per capita*

Rank refers to performance for a country in comparison to all countries in the full Social Progress Index. For the 2017 Global Social Progress Index, that sample is 128 countries.

*To reduce the effects of yearly GDP fluctuations and maintain stability in country groupings, average GDP PPP between 2011 and 2014 is used to determine country peer groups. The Social Progress Index uses GDP data from the World Bank: “GDP per capita based on purchasing power parity (PPP). PPP GDP is gross domestic product converted to international dollars using purchasing power parity rates. An international dollar has the same purchasing power over GDP as the U.S. dollar has in the United States. GDP at purchaser’s prices is the sum of gross value added by all resident producers in the economy plus any product taxes and minus any subsidies not included in the value of the products. It is calculated without making deductions for depreciation of fabricated assets or for depletion and degradation of natural resources. Data are in constant 2011 international dollars.” HTTP://DATA.WORLDBANK.ORG/INDICATOR/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD

What is the structure of the 2017 Social Progress Index and what does it measure?

The Social Progress Index is the first holistic measure of a country’s social performance that is independent of economic factors. The index is based on a range of social and environmental indicators that capture three dimensions of social progress: Basic Human Needs, Foundations of Wellbeing, and Opportunity. Each dimension is composed of four components, and each component contains between three and five indicators.

The Index measures social progress strictly using outcomes of success, not how much effort a country makes. For example, how much a country spends on healthcare is much less important than the health and wellness actually achieved by that country, which is what we are measuring.

Click on the image above to view the full size of the 2017 Social Progress Index indicator-level framework.

There are no other indices that measure social progress directly, independent of economic development, in a way that is both holistic and rigorous. Most wellbeing indices, such as the Human Development Index or the OECD Better Life Indicators, are still heavily reliant on GDP or other economic measures. These are worthy efforts to measure wellbeing and have laid important groundwork in the field. However, because they conflate economic and social factors, they cannot explain or unpack the relationship between economic development and social progress.

To calculate a Social Progress Index score, countries must have no more than one missing indicator per component. In 2017, 128 countries met that standard. We calculate component scores for an additional 33 countries that have no more than one missing indicator per component for at least nine components. New this year, we also present the data for any countries or territories that may have some indicator data, but not enough data to calculate nine components or more. For these countries, we only calculated component scores when all indicators for a component were available. In all, we present data for 236 countries and territories. Including 128 ranked countries and the partially calculated scores, the 2017 Social Progress Index represents 98% of the world’s population.

Our goal is to be transparent and show where gaps in data exist across countries and across components of the Social Progress Index. We would love to include every country in the world by working with partners to improve coverage by our data sources.

You used to label the strengths and weaknesses differently. Why did the traffic light rating (red-yellow-green) change on the 2017 Social Progress Index country scorecards?

Inclusion is one of the Social Progress Imperative’s priorities and a key design principle of the Index. We strive to make not only social progress available to everyone, but the measurement of it as well. The color labeling of strengths and weaknesses changed in 2017 to accommodate users with visual impairments, making our digital data visualizations more accessible. If additional changes need to be made to ensure greater access and value, please feel free to suggest them through the website.

Click on the image above to view this detail of a country scorecard full-size.

Today, on the country scorecards, strengths (that is, overperformance by one or more points) are represented with a blue circle/dot. Those performing within the expected range of their peers, also known as neutral performance, are represented in yellow. And as in the past, weaknesses (underperformance by one or more points) are represented in red. Performance in between a strength and neutral (overperformance by less than one point) is represented by an open, blue circle/dot. And performance in between neutral and weakness (underperformance by less than one point) is represented by an open, red circle/dot.

Yes. The Social Progress Imperative wants the data we publish to be used and disseminated. We only ask that you credit the Social Progress Index and that you do not imply that we endorse your new product.

How does the 2017 Social Progress Index relate to the Sustainable Development Goals?

The Social Progress Index covers most of the areas included in the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) agreed upon by the United Nations in September 2015. Unlike the Millennium Development Goals, which were focused primarily on poor countries, the SDGs include a broader set of targets that apply to all countries. There is considerable overlap between the SDGs and the Social Progress Index. However, the 169 SDG targets and 17 goals cover disparate areas, and it is unclear to governments and other stakeholders how they should prioritize these development objectives. That many of the SDG targets are not yet measurable also raises challenges. The Social Progress Index, unlike the SDGs, presents an organizing framework that allows social performance to be assessed separately from economic performance. As a complementary measure, the Social Progress Imperative aims to work with stakeholders to improve accountability for the ambitious SDG objectives committed to by the governments of the world.

On September 25th, 2015, 193 world leaders came together at the United Nations to agree on 17 Global Goals to achieve 3 extraordinary things in the next 15 years: end extreme poverty, reduce inequality, and protect the planet. These goals will affect every single life on this planet, but they’ll only work if every single person knows about them, and holds their leaders to account.

The Social Progress Imperative partnered with Global Citizen to create the People’s Report Cards, a tool powered by the Social Progress Index to track the world’s progress on achieving the Global Goals—and so far we’re only achieving a C plus. C plus is not good enough at school, so it’s certainly a poor grade for the whole world’s efforts to defeat poverty and provide every global citizen with the means for a good life.

To achieve the Global Goals, we must do better, and the good news is that we can. The People’s Report Cards provide the citizens of the world with the means to hold their leaders to account to help our world get from C plus to A in the time it will take children now starting school to emerge with their own final grades.

People’s Report Cards for every country will be published beginning in the fall of 2016.

The Social Progress Imperative’s mission is to improve the lives of people around the world, particularly the least well off, by advancing global social progress by: providing a robust, holistic and innovative measurement tool—the Social Progress Index; fostering research and knowledge-sharing on social progress; and equipping leaders and change-makers in business, government and civil society with new tools to guide policies and programs.

Inspired by the global index, food and agricultural company Cargill is now developing a sub-national Social Progress Index in Central America to better understand how their local supply chain relationships with co-ops, small and large businesses with local workforces, is affecting social progress in their communities. Similarly, in southern Chile, forestry company Masisa is using the Social Progress Index framework to look beyond job creation to determine how people are faring from the investments and engagement of their workforce in the communities where they operate.

As of May 2017 2016, the Social Progress Network is most active in the Latin American countries of Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, and Peru. We are actively expanding into the European Union, the United States, and Canada, as well as Iceland, India, Argentina, and Malaysia. We have received requests for partnership from countries in every region of the world and are building our own capacity to take advantage of this interest.

To achieve our mission we need to go further than just measurement alone, and equip leaders and change-makers in business, government and civil society with new tools to guide policies and investments. To this end we are building a Social Progress Network of partners in government, business and civil society who want to use the Social Progress Index tool as a starting point for action in their countries and communities.

Partner organizations in the Social Progress Network also use the Social Progress Index to raise the voices of the real social progress experts, citizens who know their own needs best and the change-makers who are working on the ground with communities. This approach helps them articulate their concerns and get the attention of leaders in politics, the private sector and civil society.

Are you a social innovator? Do you want your commitment to make a difference in people’s lives? Join us and find your place in the Social Progress Network!

Social Progress Leads—You have leadership skills, institutional support, convening capacity, long-term view, and don’t dismay. Do you want to launch a Social Progress Network?

Social Progress Fellows—You have communications skills, knowledge and expertise on social development, belong to a community of practitioners, are policy-oriented. Do you want to help us spread the word?

Social Progress Network Managers—You have networking skills, access to different communities, are action-oriented, and horizontal collaboration is your mantra. Do you want to help us manage a network?

Social Progress Methodological Experts—You have technical skills, know the context, are policy-oriented, and believe in open-data open-source movements. Do you want to help us generate actionable metrics?

The movement to complement traditional economic measurement with innovative tools to advance social progress is growing. Applying the Social Progress Index conceptual and methodological framework is working as a way to highlight challenges and bring new partners together to drive change in communities around the world. Join our network of partners in government, business, academia, and civil society who are using the Social Progress Index tool as a catalyst for action.

Please use the comment form to contact us, indicating a ‘partnership’ inquiry, and we’ll reply just as soon as we can.

The Social Progress Imperative is changing the way we solve the world’s most pressing challenges by redefining how the world measures success and putting the things that matter to people’s lives at the top of the agenda. We do so by partnering with individuals and organizations who are committed to developing tools and strategies to advance social progress in their own communities.

The Social Progress Imperative is changing the way we solve the world’s most pressing challenges by redefining how the world measures success and putting the things that matter to people’s lives at the top of the agenda. We do so by partnering with individuals and organizations who are committed to developing tools and strategies to advance social progress in their own communities.

The EU Regional Social Progress Index measures social progress for each of the 272 regions of the 28 member states of the European Union and complements traditional measures of economic progress such as GDP, income or employment. As it is intended to complement such measures, it purposely leaves these indicators out of the index. It follows the overall framework of the global Social Progress Index but, as do all adaptations of the Index, uses different indicators. As a result of these indicators and other differences in methodology, such as the years of data used to create the Index, performance on the EU Index is not comparable to performance on the global Index.

There are several ways that individuals can help support the efforts of the Social Progress Imperative to advance social progress around the world.

Social media: We are in the early years still of convincing a critical mass of people to consider measurement of social progress as important as measurement of traditional economic factors. Follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, and help us connect with your social media connections. Tell us when you see something relevant to our work, or sign up to receive occasional notices when we could use your help to promote particular messages or news.

Media: Consider writing an op-ed or letter to the editor of your favorite newspaper or magazine. We need your help to spread our messages.

Volunteer: We are a small team with global ambitions. If you are interested in contributing your time to our effort, please use our comment form and let us know. We can probably figure something out, particularly if you’re flexible.

Intern: Consider applying for one of our occasional internships to work in our Washington, DC, or San Jose, Costa Rica offices. Check the Employment page to see if we’re actively recruiting.

Help us monitor media: Particularly for languages other than English, Spanish and Portuguese. See a story about our work? Use our comment form or tell us on social media to help us gauge our effectiveness and get our work in front of even more people.

Receive our newsletter: Consider signing up to receive our occasional email newsletter to understand our major milestones and plans, and then share with others. Your promotion of our work is the most effective way we have to reach more people.

The Social Progress Imperative is building a movement to improve lives globally.Donate now and help us define the world you want.

Through regional and national partnerships—the growing Social Progress Network—we are building a global “network of networks” promoted by the Social Progress Imperative. Under this umbrella, early adopters are engaging in initiatives that use the conceptual and methodological framework of the Social Progress Index as a starting point for action in their own countries and communities.

Strong progress has been made in Latin America, where dynamic networks have emerged since the publication of the beta version of the Index three years ago; especially in the Brazilian Amazon, Pará State, andRIO DE JANEIRO IN BRAZIL, with the national government in Paraguay, and in Colombia, with a special focus on cities. In 2017, the Social Progress Network is expanding to theEUROPEAN UNIONand the United States, collaborating with international organizations like the European Commission and subnational governments like the city of Somerville, Massachusetts.